What Are Animals?

[Eitan]

Of course it's a religious definition, in that it relies on knowledge of God and our ultimate origins and destination. It is also, however, a practical one.

Hmmm, I guess I have a problem with the word "knowledge" in this context. "...relies on a belief in God and our ultimate origins..." I have no problem with. Its just that we shouldn't pretend to KNOW things we cannot possibly know. We can believe them and live accordingly, but let's not kid ourselves.

[Jason]

Hmmm, I guess I have a problem with the word "knowledge" in this context. "...relies on a belief in God and our ultimate origins..." I have no problem with. Its just that we shouldn't pretend to KNOW things we cannot possibly know. We can believe them and live accordingly, but let's not kid ourselves.

We also shouldn't pretend to not know things that we in fact know just as well as we know anything, in a life where nothing is 100% sure.

[thesometimesaint]

Jason:

Shave a Irish Setter and you don't get a Chihuahua either. Both they are both still dogs. Humans are by definition Naked Apes http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Naked_Ape_%28book%29

[Jeff K.]

Not sure a baked potato would make the fathead fish worth it.

I have had sea slugs, the fish isn't a problem for me.

[mfbukowski]

In a good way or a bad way? XD

Good way!

Amazing how you came up with that.

[mfbukowski]

The comments up above suggest that we are not, ourselves, animals. In fact, we are. our taxonomy goes something like this:

Kingdom - Animalia/Metazoa

Phylum - Chordata

Class - Mammalia

Order - Primates

Family - Hominidae

Genus - Homo

Species - Homo Sapiens

...and I guess you could extend that to

Subspiecies - Homo sapiens sapiens (or modern man)

Uh huh.

As usual it all comes down to someone's definitions, huh?

[mfbukowski]

Jason:

Some humans are incapable of making moral judgments. Does that make them plants?

That is a religious definition. The Supernatural is not something the Natural can address.

Therefore humans are animals. Naked Apes to be more precise.

Well I would like to talk to "the Natural" about that, if he is the guy who makes up the definitions.

My point is that nature didn't make that up, people did. I can imagine any number of other possible classification systems, yet of all the possible ones, we assume one is "real" because we have always been told that.

[mfbukowski]

Hmmm, I guess I have a problem with the word "knowledge" in this context. "...relies on a belief in God and our ultimate origins..." I have no problem with. Its just that we shouldn't pretend to KNOW things we cannot possibly know. We can believe them and live accordingly, but let's not kid ourselves.

Oh, please DO define "knowledge".

That problem has been around a few thousand years.

[mfbukowski]

Humans are by definition....

Need I say more?

I don't accept the definition.